@Knight of Rosen said:
If you really can't handle people saying mean and dumb shit, you should probably stick to single player games. Cause this aint something that's just gonna be changed over night, it happens in every online game, and will likely continue in every online game for a long time yet.
This sounds suspiciously like 'it isn't going to change, so you might as well do nothing.'
IDK about others in this thread, but all I'm arguing for is bare minimum moderation for extremist views, targeted harassment and racism like most games have.
@ItsDatBoii said:
"You can't spread hate peach!!!"
Fuck you and your invented terms. You're willingly adopting the infantile orwellian shitty new age terms some fat self annointed (((intelectual))) invented. You say free speech's definition is stretched, what about the all purpose bullshit terms you use? The reality of the sjw's being a fringe minority means jack shit. You sway the masses through the perception of public opinion. This perception has moved so much to your shitty side of the isle that you think you can come up with this bullshit text wall and think people give a fuck. Eat shit and die.
Last post (before you edited it) you were using all of the racist slurs you could think of, now you're doing the ((())) jew meme. If anything, you're proving my point that the no racism rule is barely enforced on this forum.
I thought it still looked very clunky compared to Mordhau, but honestly I hope it will be good. Competition in this genre would be nice. As long as the playerbase isn't too divided.
@whatsupbuddymen said:
The reason for people whining about this on steam forums and such is because they tried telling people which words they can and cannot use ingame and quickly found out there's no systems in place that would allow them to control anyones choice of words or ideas to communicate.
Since there's no systems in place that would let them control what people say, they're complaining in the hopes that they'll get one.
seems all pretty natural to me and does not indicate a "rise of racism and offensive content" or whatever the fuck you're throwing out there. It's not that people say bad words more, it's that people get fed up they can't keep them from doing it.
You allready cant do anything you want. Every country has a lawsystem. You cant just blindly run around and gun people down or beat them up if its not self defense. You arent allowed to rob them or stalk them. Most justice systems can even order you to stay away a few 100 meter from a person you activly try to stalk.
If those laws are valid in the real world then i cant see one reason why they shouldnt be also valid in the internet.And they are in most countries. Cyber mobbing is a crime in most countries, its just hard to prove because of the anonymity factor.
I agree with you that there are a lot of SJWs and Femnazis out there which just want to establish double standards, to have more rights then others do, in the cover of the justice system. And the society has to fight against those, which happens not strictly enough at the moment, because they hide under the people who really only want an equal playingfield.
But you guys are on a witchhunt. There is no law in the world which gives you the right to stalk and cyber mob others in the internet 24/7 and follow them arround from server to server, when they play a game, just to ruin their experience on purpose, because you dont like the way they look or their sexuality or race.
If everybody would act like you and would say: "I have to right to treat others purposly like shit and physicaly and psychologically harass and stalk them, because i dont like the way they look" then we had allready civil war in every country. The U.S.A is allready close to a civil war. I would give them 10-20 years from now and then democrats and republicans will start killing each other openly on the street. Some of them allready do that now and its only getting worse from now.
I agree with almost everything you said, except that there are a lot of SJW's and Faminazi's out there. It's a label that's used by dishonest people to, ironically, silence speech they don't agree with. Whenever someone is an SJW, you can safely ignore what they have to say, is the idea. So if you say you're against racism, they say some variation of 'you're just against free speech, you wanna take away our rights, you're just triggered by bad words, what's next, compelled speech? You must be some kind of SJW.' In reality, SJWs are a fringe group that aren't even taken seriously by other progressives. So don't make the label more credible by painting them as some huge political movement. Now for my 2 cents on offensive chat behaviour.
While I think free speech is important, the definition of 'free' is already stretched. You can't just say anything, and for good reason. You can't spread hatespeech, for example. Or call to violence. Or yell "bomb" at an airport, (cyber)bullying is a crime in many countries... There are good reasons to install rules like these, it makes communities safer and more pleasant, and prevents measurable harm. Also, telling people to kill themselves may seem innocent in a gaming context, but if you say that to someone already psychically unwell, you're adding another drop to the bucket. I think that's highly damaging. Since you never know who the real world person behind the online username is, erring on the side of caution is the best way to deal with these risks.
Now, gaming communities are notorious for being bad, but this community seems particularly toxic*. It's something about the medieval genre that attracts people with.. well, let's just call it 'extremely edgy opinions,' but you all know what I mean. Combine that with the literal imbeciles that don't know spamming the n-word in all caps 99 times, making the normal chatter going on unreadable, isn't actually as hilarious as they think, and I believe the community could benefit from some amount of moderation. Most online games already have word filters in place (I'm not a big fan of these since they censor without taking into account the context in which the word is used) and see abusive language as a bannable offence. Like on Xbox Live if you send someone an abusive message and they report you, you can get a 24 hour ban. That seems reasonable to me. It's not like you can't have a 'heated gamer moment' (think Pewdiepie's n-word incident) without being banned permanently.
I don't think a private company making the chat experience more bearable for it's users instead of catering to the edge lords is an attack or breach of free speech. It's customer service and quality control. Officially, things like racism aren't allowed on the forums (although rarely enforced imo). It's easy and seems obvious to extend these rules to the game itself. They would be in place for the same reason. If these rules already are in place, they should be enforced better.
But hey, I'm probably one of the older guys around compared to most, and I've been that edgy kid before, but you're supposed to grow out of that. Now, I think actions should have consequences. If you cause harm, bully or act in a racist way on a video game, you're doing, or risk doing, measurable damage to other customers. That's bad. Triternion should take responsibility for a good online user experience for all their customers, even if they are degenerate gays and n-
So to summarise, I'm in favour of moderation, but not a word filter. I think you shouldn't be able to say anything you want when it hurts other players. I think the FEELINGS of people that want to be racist, homophobic, sexist, abusive in whatever way, should NOT take precedent over the FACT that people could be literally/mentally harmed by this kind of behaviour, and the fact that the community is more healthy and enjoyable for most people when everyone treats each other nicely. Of course the latter is never going to happen, but at least we can make an effort to weed out the really rotten apples that spoil the bunch.
*I wanted to caveat this part by saying there are also very good sides of the community. Think of gentlemen's agreements in Skirmish to duel the last person, people starting fistfights on the battlefield and not being interrupted by people with weapons, people acting as referees in duel servers, people happy to learn new players how to play, people politely saying 'gf' after being destroyed by someone with much more skill, spontaneous teamwork like shield walls in team battles, hell, I've even met people I consider real life friends on Chivalry and Mordhau. But when this is all really good, the bad stuff you come across is also really bad.
@Ikarus said:
Everyone must have realized that the archery system is broken, very slow and out of the reality. I suggest watching this video, which shows historical facts of how it was more dynamic and fast.
Obviously the archer is extremely skilled, but suggests it would be a common skill in medieval times.
lars andersen should not be taken seriously when it comes to history, he is a good circus act but he is wrong about how archery was done in the middle ages, both misinterpreting historical sources as well as neglecting to mention certain things. what he says about archers in the past not standing still is pure horseshit
also he uses a low poundage bow, not the kind of thing suitable for a medieval battlefield; if he used a bow with a heavier draw weight that was appropriate to bring into war, he would have a much harder time pulling these tricks off so quickly
here's just one video debating some of the things he says https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2fugtMuGMI
I wish this was common knowledge. The guy has a great act and does neat stuff, for which I respect him, but the fact that he is purposely misrepresenting history makes me lose that respect instantly. He claims to have found lost secret techniques among other bs. So many people have the wrong ideas about historical archery thanks to this guy. And he knows what he's doing, he's been called out for it many times.
@Mackintoke said:
That's not true at all, faulty "king" of the north. I don't accuse I state facts: I'm all for women in the game, and I'm all for butchering sjw faggotry. Quit side tracking and twisting words/making up shit you weak fuckhead.
@Abbey: Take a hike, retard.
Ah yes, the old 'I didn't say what you can literally see me say on the previous page'. A true 5head take.
@TheKingInTheNorth said:
Is it really that hard for shield users to either:
walk backwards when defending
not hold their shield up 24/7?
How kick works against shield rn is a good thing, it keeps it from being a crutch for bad players and forces you to learn the game even if just a little. You still have the advantage of long parry times and being OP in team fights.
Is it really that hard to use your brain and not say retarded shit?
If you're such a genius I'm sure you have an actual argument?
Is it really that hard for shield users to either:
walk backwards when defending
not hold their shield up 24/7?
How kick works against shield rn is a good thing, it keeps it from being a crutch for bad players and forces you to learn the game even if just a little. You still have the advantage of long parry times and being OP in team fights.
Wanting women in your video game is really not an SJW issue lmao. Even in BF5, where it caused more of a storm than this game, it's completely fine. Historical fiction is a thing. You might as well be complaining that Wolfenstein 3d is a bad game because it had Mecha-Hitler.
@Vipes said:
I couldn't care either way, in the end it's just another option. The game isn't striving to be 100% realistic. I don't recall tomato people or giants existing in real life. Not to mention the mix and match of armor and weapons from different eras. Also, there were a few accounts of women warriors. Not many, but they existed. Enough to be noteworthy at least. Joan of Arc anyone?
Anyone who is actively and truly losing their shit over this has more issues deep down to worry about than "female knights".
...but since Vikings are in the game all we have to point to is shieldmaidens.
The funny thing about the historical argument against women in this game is that it's technically not even a solid argument. While women fighters were rare in the middle ages, they did exist. But again, the historical argument is useless since this game is set in a fictional medieval world, not the historical one.
12 Jun
TheKingInTheNorthThis sounds suspiciously like 'it isn't going to change, so you might as well do nothing.'
IDK about others in this thread, but all I'm arguing for is bare minimum moderation for extremist views, targeted harassment and racism like most games have.
12 Jun
TheKingInTheNorthLast post (before you edited it) you were using all of the racist slurs you could think of, now you're doing the ((())) jew meme. If anything, you're proving my point that the no racism rule is barely enforced on this forum.
10 Jun
TheKingInTheNorthI thought it still looked very clunky compared to Mordhau, but honestly I hope it will be good. Competition in this genre would be nice. As long as the playerbase isn't too divided.
10 Jun
TheKingInTheNorthThoughts?
- 1
8 Jun
TheKingInTheNorthI agree with almost everything you said, except that there are a lot of SJW's and Faminazi's out there. It's a label that's used by dishonest people to, ironically, silence speech they don't agree with. Whenever someone is an SJW, you can safely ignore what they have to say, is the idea. So if you say you're against racism, they say some variation of 'you're just against free speech, you wanna take away our rights, you're just triggered by bad words, what's next, compelled speech? You must be some kind of SJW.' In reality, SJWs are a fringe group that aren't even taken seriously by other progressives. So don't make the label more credible by painting them as some huge political movement. Now for my 2 cents on offensive chat behaviour.
While I think free speech is important, the definition of 'free' is already stretched. You can't just say anything, and for good reason. You can't spread hatespeech, for example. Or call to violence. Or yell "bomb" at an airport, (cyber)bullying is a crime in many countries... There are good reasons to install rules like these, it makes communities safer and more pleasant, and prevents measurable harm. Also, telling people to kill themselves may seem innocent in a gaming context, but if you say that to someone already psychically unwell, you're adding another drop to the bucket. I think that's highly damaging. Since you never know who the real world person behind the online username is, erring on the side of caution is the best way to deal with these risks.
Now, gaming communities are notorious for being bad, but this community seems particularly toxic*. It's something about the medieval genre that attracts people with.. well, let's just call it 'extremely edgy opinions,' but you all know what I mean. Combine that with the literal imbeciles that don't know spamming the n-word in all caps 99 times, making the normal chatter going on unreadable, isn't actually as hilarious as they think, and I believe the community could benefit from some amount of moderation. Most online games already have word filters in place (I'm not a big fan of these since they censor without taking into account the context in which the word is used) and see abusive language as a bannable offence. Like on Xbox Live if you send someone an abusive message and they report you, you can get a 24 hour ban. That seems reasonable to me. It's not like you can't have a 'heated gamer moment' (think Pewdiepie's n-word incident) without being banned permanently.
I don't think a private company making the chat experience more bearable for it's users instead of catering to the edge lords is an attack or breach of free speech. It's customer service and quality control. Officially, things like racism aren't allowed on the forums (although rarely enforced imo). It's easy and seems obvious to extend these rules to the game itself. They would be in place for the same reason. If these rules already are in place, they should be enforced better.
But hey, I'm probably one of the older guys around compared to most, and I've been that edgy kid before, but you're supposed to grow out of that. Now, I think actions should have consequences. If you cause harm, bully or act in a racist way on a video game, you're doing, or risk doing, measurable damage to other customers. That's bad. Triternion should take responsibility for a good online user experience for all their customers, even if they are degenerate gays and n-
So to summarise, I'm in favour of moderation, but not a word filter. I think you shouldn't be able to say anything you want when it hurts other players. I think the FEELINGS of people that want to be racist, homophobic, sexist, abusive in whatever way, should NOT take precedent over the FACT that people could be literally/mentally harmed by this kind of behaviour, and the fact that the community is more healthy and enjoyable for most people when everyone treats each other nicely. Of course the latter is never going to happen, but at least we can make an effort to weed out the really rotten apples that spoil the bunch.
*I wanted to caveat this part by saying there are also very good sides of the community. Think of gentlemen's agreements in Skirmish to duel the last person, people starting fistfights on the battlefield and not being interrupted by people with weapons, people acting as referees in duel servers, people happy to learn new players how to play, people politely saying 'gf' after being destroyed by someone with much more skill, spontaneous teamwork like shield walls in team battles, hell, I've even met people I consider real life friends on Chivalry and Mordhau. But when this is all really good, the bad stuff you come across is also really bad.
3 Jun
TheKingInTheNorthThread closed wen
26 May
TheKingInTheNorthI wish this was common knowledge. The guy has a great act and does neat stuff, for which I respect him, but the fact that he is purposely misrepresenting history makes me lose that respect instantly. He claims to have found lost secret techniques among other bs. So many people have the wrong ideas about historical archery thanks to this guy. And he knows what he's doing, he's been called out for it many times.
25 May
TheKingInTheNorthOMEGALUL
20 May
TheKingInTheNorthAh yes, the old 'I didn't say what you can literally see me say on the previous page'. A true 5head take.
20 May
TheKingInTheNorthIf you're such a genius I'm sure you have an actual argument?
20 May
TheKingInTheNorthIs it really that hard for shield users to either:
How kick works against shield rn is a good thing, it keeps it from being a crutch for bad players and forces you to learn the game even if just a little. You still have the advantage of long parry times and being OP in team fights.
- 1
20 May
TheKingInTheNorthEdit: literally go one page back and you're accusing everyone that wants women of being an SJW lul
- 1
20 May
TheKingInTheNorthWanting women in your video game is really not an SJW issue lmao. Even in BF5, where it caused more of a storm than this game, it's completely fine. Historical fiction is a thing. You might as well be complaining that Wolfenstein 3d is a bad game because it had Mecha-Hitler.
19 May
TheKingInTheNorthThe only reasonable solution.
19 May
TheKingInTheNorthIt's part of the game.
18 May
TheKingInTheNorthhttp://www.medievalists.net/2014/07/ten-medieval-warrior-women/
...but since Vikings are in the game all we have to point to is shieldmaidens.
The funny thing about the historical argument against women in this game is that it's technically not even a solid argument. While women fighters were rare in the middle ages, they did exist. But again, the historical argument is useless since this game is set in a fictional medieval world, not the historical one.
17 May
TheKingInTheNorthIn short, a close quarters 'ranged' weapon that does massive damage... He wants a medieval shotgun. It's going to be obnoxious.
17 May
TheKingInTheNorthPeasant
Bandit
Knight 1
Knight 2
16 May
TheKingInTheNorthImagine unironically asking for ingame currency microtransactions lul
13 May
TheKingInTheNorthLiterally just paste the link lol. I think you posted a shortened link though that's probably why it didn't work.